That tale is unlikely to generate much sympathy from the public, especially after prosecutors last week released e-mails Lindh sent to his parents expressing his contempt for the United States. “What has America ever done for anybody?” read one message. But it could help in the courtroom, where Lindh, 21, plans to plead not guilty this week to conspiracy, terrorism and weapons charges stemming from his strange sojourn as a Taliban warrior in Afghanistan.
Will the strategy work? There was evidence last week that even when it comes to the war on terror, pictures count. Invoking the image of jailers and their shackled, blindfolded charges, European allies pressured the Bush administration to alter its policy on the military detainees held at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. Despite his earlier refusal, Bush agreed to apply the Geneva Conventions to the detainees, as long as they fought for the Taliban but not for Al Qaeda. The hair-splitting adjustment has no practical effect–the administration says all detainees will be treated humanely and that its real objective was to protect future American captives–but it does serve as a reminder that due process remains a potent American ideal.
For that same reason, convicting Lindh, even after he allegedly told his government interrogators that he received weapons training at a Qaeda training camp and met Osama bin Laden, may not turn out to be such a slam-dunk.
The heart of the defense’s strategy: getting the confession thrown out. Lindh’s lawyers have attacked its credibility head-on, noting that the government did not record it, transcribe it or get him to sign it. They have also suggested that the FBI may have violated its own procedures by having only one agent–not two, as called for in the rule book–interrogate Lindh. The FBI denies it erred. “If the confession is suppressed, then large parts of the government’s case would fall,” says Eugene Fidell, a Washington lawyer who specializes in military-justice issues.
NEWSWEEK has learned that Lindh’s lawyers plan to bolster their case for coercion by calling as witnesses the military personnel who guarded Lindh and who they claim abused him in the days prior to his confession. Lindh, now crew-cut and cleanshaven and speaking without his faux Arabic accent, is also being prepared to testify.
The government could have a more difficult time finding anyone to corroborate the details of Lindh’s confession. Lindh’s attorney James Brosnahan claims there is “no living witness”–except, perhaps, for Osama bin Laden, who presumably has his own legal problems. Even if some of Lindh’s fellow Qaeda trainees could be found, they’d be a tough sell on the witness stand. Prosecutors say the tempest over Lindh’s confession is only a distraction from his behavior. Saying that Lindh’s rights have been “carefully, scrupulously honored,” Attorney General John Ashcroft called Lindh an “active, knowing participant” in a “time line of terror.” Prosecutors hinted that there is plenty of additional evidence to back their case. But Lindh’s team says the government’s effort is driven by frustration over its inability to catch bin Laden. “They have brought out the cannon to shoot the mouse,” said Brosnahan. That could be, but the mouse is still running scared.
